alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 975 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 975

To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for the participation 
   of physical therapists in the National Health Service Corps Loan 
               Repayment Program, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 12, 2011

  Mr. Tester (for himself, Mr. Wicker, and Mr. Akaka) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                 Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for the participation 
   of physical therapists in the National Health Service Corps Loan 
               Repayment Program, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Physical Therapist Student Loan 
Repayment Eligibility Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE CORPS; PARTICIPATION OF PHYSICAL 
              THERAPISTS IN LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM.

    (a) Mission of Corps; Definition of Primary Health Services.--
Section 331(a)(3)(D) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
254d(a)(3)(D)) is amended by striking ``or mental health,'' and 
inserting ``mental health, or physical therapy,''.
    (b) Loan Repayment Program.--Section 338B of the Public Health 
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 254l-1) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``and physician 
        assistants;'' and inserting ``physician assistants, and 
        physical therapists;''; and
            (2) in subsection (b)(1)--
                    (A) in subparagraph (A), by inserting before the 
                semicolon at the end the following: ``, or have a 
                doctoral or master's degree in physical therapy'';
                    (B) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ``physical 
                therapy,'' after ``mental health,''; and
                    (C) in subparagraph (C)(ii), by inserting 
                ``physical therapy,'' after ``dentistry,''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Austin K. Haldenstein Realty, Inc., Respondent, v *544Arthur Elgort, Appellant.

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Wallach, J.), entered on October 28, 1985, and judgment of said court, entered thereon on November 13, 1985, unanimously affirmed for the reasons stated by Richard Wallach, J., at Special Term. Respondent shall recover of appellant one bill of $75 costs and disbursements of these appeals. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Carro, Fein and Ellerin, JJ.
#### PEOPLE ex rel. MALONEY, Appellant, v. LAZANSKY et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

April 4, 1912.)

Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of John Maloney, against Edward 'Lazansky and others. No opinion. Order unanimously affirmed, without costs.
# C_2022418EN.01001501.xml

| 31.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 418/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 418/15

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — BNetzA v ACER

(Case T-631/19) (1)

(Energy - Internal market in electricity - Regulation (EU) 2019/942 - Decision of the Board of Appeal of ACER - Action for annulment - Act not open to challenge - Inadmissibility - ACER’s competence - Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 713/2009 - Article 6(10) of Regulation 2019/942 - Article 9(12) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1222 - Applicable law - Regulation (EU) 2019/943)

(2022/C 418/17)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Bundesnetzagentur für Elektrizität, Gas, Telekommunikation, Post und Eisenbahnen (BNetzA) (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: H. Haller, N. Gremminger, L. Reiser, V. Vacha and C. Dietz-Polte, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (represented by: P. Martinet and E. Tremmel, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment in part of Decision No 02/2019 of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) of 21 February 2019 on the Core CCR TSOs’ proposals for the regional design of the day-ahead and intraday common capacity calculation methodologies, and, secondly, annulment of Decision A-003-2019 of the Board of Appeal of ACER of 11 July 2019 dismissing its appeal against the initial decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Decision A-003-2019 of the Board of Appeal of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) of 11 July 2019; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Decision A-003-2019 of the Board of Appeal of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) of 11 July 2019;

| 2. | Dismisses the remainder of the action as inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the remainder of the action as inadmissible;

| 3. | Orders ACER to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders ACER to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.

---
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 138 (Thursday, July 22, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 38732]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15633]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4590-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]


Louisiana; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Louisiana (FEMA-4590-DR), dated March 9, 2021, and 
related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued June 22, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Louisiana is hereby amended to include the following 
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by 
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration 
of March 9, 2021.

    Allen, Beauregard, Lincoln, St. Helena, Union, and Washington 
Parishes for debris removal [Category A] and permanent work 
[Categories C-G] (already designated for emergency protective 
measures [Category B], including direct federal assistance, under 
the Public Assistance program)
    Bossier, Caddo, Catahoula, Concordia, DeSoto, East Baton Rouge, 
Grant, LaSalle, and Ouachita Parishes for debris removal [Category 
A] and permanent work [Categories C-G] (already designated for 
Individual Assistance and emergency protective measures [Category 
B], including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance 
program).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster 
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance 
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and 
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing 
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other 
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially 
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.


Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-15633 Filed 7-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
Letter dated October 20, 2009 to William A. Caton



 EXHIBIT 10.103 
  

			
	

	  	 Navistar, Inc.
 4201
Winfield Road
 Warrenville, IL 60555 USA
  
 P: 630-753-5000
 W:
navistar.com


 October 20, 2009 
 Mr. William A. Caton 
 427 Brantley Place 
 Wheaton, IL 60187 
 Dear Bill: 
 As approved by Navistar International Corporation’s Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors on October 19, 2009, this letter confirms an
additional agreement item beyond what was agreed to in your July 2, 2008 letter from Steven Covey and me and your Amendment of Executive Severance Agreement (ESA) effective June 17, 2008. 
 Your Amendment of ESA provided you with “continued healthcare coverage for the 36 month period immediately after the date of Termination, with the same
coverage option as in effect immediately before the date of Termination...” If after this 36 month period of continued coverage, you are not able to purchase comparable healthcare coverage for you and your spouse, Navistar will provide you
with the opportunity to purchase Navistar’s coverage at the 100% cost of coverage rate, in affect at the time, until which time you and/or your spouse, Vicci, are eligible for Medicare benefits. 
  

	
	Sincerely,
	
	/S/    GREG W.
ELLIOTT        
	 Greg W. Elliott
 Senior VP, HR and Administration


  

 E-18
Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     Pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of
Chapter  63 of Title 18 of the  United  States  Code),  each of the  undersigned
officers of AGU  Entertainment  Corp.  (the  "Company") does hereby certify with
respect to the Annual  Report of the Company on Form 10-KSB for the period ended
December 31, 2005 (the "Report") that:

     (1) The Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except for the filing date; and

     (2)  The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of operations of the
Company.

Date:  May 11, 2006                         /s/David C. Levy
                                            -----------------------------------
                                            David C. Levy
                                            President


Date:  May 11, 2006                         /s/John W. Poling
                                            -----------------------------------
                                            John W. Poling
                                            Chief Financial Officer

     The foregoing  certification  is being furnished solely pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of
the  United  States  Code) and is not being  filed as part of the Report or as a
separate disclosure document.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT



         Pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, the undersigned officer of Renaissance Learning, Inc. (the "Company"),
hereby certifies that, to the undersigned's knowledge:

         (1)      the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
                  ended March 31, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the
                  requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the
                  Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2)      the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Company.


Dated:  May 5, 2004
        -----------


                                        /s/ Steven A. Schmidt
                                        ---------------------------------------
                                        Name:  Steven A. Schmidt
                                        Title: Executive Vice President and
                                               Chief Financial Officer



THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT ACCOMPANIES THIS REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 AND SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE FILED BY THE COMPANY
FOR PURPOSES OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stanley A. SLUPKOWSKI, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-8336.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 25, 2011.

Decided: Aug. 11, 2011.

Walter H. Paramore, III, Walter H. Paramore, III, P.C., Jacksonville, North Carolina, for Appellant. David T. Huband, Bureau of Prisons, Butner, North Carolina; Jennifer P. May-Parker, Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appel-lee.

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Stanley A. Slupkowski appeals the district court’s order, following a hearing, that he continues to meet the criteria for commitment to the custody of the Attorney General pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4246 (2006). Specifically, the district court determined that Slupkowski continues to suffer from a mental disease or defect as a result of which his release would create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person or serious damage to property of another.

We review the district court’s determination for clear error. *United States v. Cox,*964 F.2d 1431, 1433 (4th Cir.1992). A factual finding is clearly erroneous when the reviewing court is “left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” *Anderson v. City of Bessemer City,*470 U.S. 564, 573, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). We have reviewed the record and find that the district court’s determination is supported by the record and is not clearly erroneous. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the *810district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
Second Department,

April, 2012

(April 3, 2012)

#### Maria Canales Agudo, Appellant, v Gloria Zhinin, Defendant, and Dana Kosits et al., Respondents.

[941 NYS2d 262]

*681In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Liebowitz, J.), entered April 20, 2011, as, in effect, denied her cross motion pursuant to CPLR 306-b for an extension of time to serve the summons and complaint upon the defendants Dana Kosits and Lisa Kosits.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by, in effect, denying the plaintiffs cross motion pursuant to CPLR 306-b for an extension of time to serve the summons and complaint upon the defendants Dana Kosits and Lisa Kosits (hereinafter together the defendants). The plaintiff did not show good cause for failing to properly effect service of the summons and complaint on the defendants in the first place *(see*CPLR 306-b; *Khodeeva v Chi Chung Yip,*84 AD3d 1030, 1030-1031 [2011]; *Matter of Palmieri v New York State Dept. of Envtl. Conservation,*31 AD3d 647, 647-648 [2006], *cert denied*550 US 903 [2007]; *cf. McSorley v Spear,*50 AD3d 652 [2008]). In addition, the plaintiff did not establish that the interest of justice would be served by extending the time to effect proper service. “The interest of justice standard requires a careful judicial analysis of the factual setting of the case and a balancing of the competing interests presented by the parties” *(Leader v Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer,*97 NY2d 95, 105 [2001]; *see Colon v Bailey,*26 AD3d 454, 455-456 [2006]). Here, the plaintiffs failure, in particular, to make any attempt to demonstrate that her claim was meritorious warranted denial of her cross motion *(see Colon v Bailey,*26 AD3d at 456). Dillon, J.P., Balkin, Belen and Austin, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 23.1**
**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration Statements of ourreports dated March 8, 2005, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of ITLA CapitalCorporation, ITLA Capital Corporation management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting of ITLA Capital Corporation, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the yearended December 31, 2004.   Form S-3 No. 333-102194 ITLA Capital CorporationForm S-3 No. 333-102194-01 ITLA Capital CorporationForm S-3 No. 333-102194-02 ITLA Capital CorporationForm S-8 No. 333-28901 ITLA Capital Corporation 1995 Employee Stock Incentive PlanForm S-8 No. 333-28931 ITLA Capital Corporation 1995 Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee DirectorsForm S-8 No. 333-28899 ITLA Capital Corporation Voluntary Retainer Stock and Deferred Compensation Plan for Outside Directors
/s/ Ernst &Young LLP
Los Angeles, California
**EXHIBIT 13****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**     In connection with this Annual Report of SAP AG (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the yearended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), we, Prof. Dr. Henning Kagermann, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Dr.Werner Brandt, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to our knowledge:     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and     (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Dated April 2, 2008    Name:  Prof. Dr. Henning Kagermann         Title:  Chief Executive Officer      Dated April 2, 2008    Name:  Dr. Werner Brandt               Title:  Chief Financial Officer        The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 andis not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
Exhibit 31.1

Certifications

SECTION 302

I, Frank D. Puissegur, certify that:

1. I have reviewed
this annual report on Form 10-K of American Commerce Solutions, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and
have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the Evaluation Date); and

c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrants
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls; and

6. The registrants other certifying officers
and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any
corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



|                       |  |                                                                    |  |              
|---------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | -------------
|/s/ Frank D. Puissegur |  | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) and Director |  | June 14, 2009
|Frank D. Puissegur     |  |                                                                    |
#### Rosemarie A. Konsek, Appellant, v Stop-N-Go Foods, Inc., et al., Respondents.

Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, and new trial granted. Memorandum: The court erred in refusing plaintiff’s request to charge the jury that evidence of absence of prior accidents at the location where plaintiff fell was a factor for the jury to consider but was not conclusive on the issue of whether the sidewalk was defective *(see, Orlick v Granit Hotel & Country Club,*30 NY2d 246; *Wozniak v 100 S. Main St. Land & Dev. Improvement Corp.,*61 AD2d 848). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Joslin, J.—negligence.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Pine and Schnepp, JJ.
Exhibit 99.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Optical Cable Corporation (the Company) amendment no. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended October 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Amendment), I, Neil D. Wilkin, Jr., President (chief executive officer) and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:



|(1) |  | The Amendment fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) |  | The information contained in the Amendment fairly represents, in all material aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    May 1, 2003

By:

/s/  NEIL D. WILKIN,
JR.Neil D.
Wilkin, Jr. President (chief executive officer) andChief Financial Officer